Dismissed¶31

Pole Ram v. Ram Kishan Sharma -Deceased through Lrs and Ors.

Delhi HC13 Jan 2026CM(M)/75/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Article 227 petition dismissed; Trial Court orders of 10.09.2025 and 25.09.2025 upheld; witnesses discharged as unexamined; PE stands closed; plaintiff's evidence closed after 12 years; issues framed 09.04.2014; suit of year 2010; last and final opportunity 01.09.2025; nine fresh witnesses introduced without list of witnesses; 13 witnesses already examined; setting-aside application dismissed for want of cogent ground; no infirmity or illegality; no interference by High Court; delay attributable to petitioner's opportunities; one of 20 oldest matters; diet money; Delhi High Court; CM(M) 75/2026; Rajneesh Kumar Gupta; 13.01.2026.

What did the court decide?

This Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the impugned Trial Court order and it does not call for any interference. ¶30

Pole Ram Vs Ram Kishan Sharma -Deceased through Lrs… — Writ and Judicial Review | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶31

Issue for consideration

Whether the Trial Court's orders dated 10.09.2025 (discharging both witnesses as unexamined and closing the plaintiff's evidence) and 25.09.2025 (dismissing the application seeking setting aside of the former) contain any infirmity or illegality calling for interference by this Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.

¶16

Court's answer

This Court finds no infirmity or illegality in the impugned Trial Court order and it does not call for any interference.

¶30

Ratio / Principle

The non-interference rests on the trial having been unnecessarily delayed on account of the opportunities taken by the petitioner himself to lead his evidence, with issues framed on 09.04.2014, the plaintiff's-evidence stage persisting for over 11 years and the suit pertaining to the year 2010.

¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Delhi High Court (Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, J.; order dated 13.01.2026), CM(M) 75/2026 - Pole Ram v. Ram Kishan Sharma (deceased) through LRs & Ors.: Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution assailing the Trial Court's order dated 25.09.2025, which dismissed the petitioner's application seeking setting aside of the Trial Court's order dated 10.09.2025, whereby both witnesses then produced were 'discharged as unexamined', diet money was paid, and the plaintiff's evidence (PE) stood closed. The quoted orders record that issues were framed on 09.04.2014 in a suit of the year 2010; the matter lingered at the PE stage for 11-12 years despite a 'last and final opportunity' granted on 01.09.2025, after which nine fresh witnesses were introduced without any list of witnesses, 13 witnesses already having been examined. Holding that the delay flowed from the petitioner's own repeated opportunities and finding 'no infirmity or illegality' in the impugned order, the High Court declined interference and dismissed the petition as devoid of merits; all pending applications were disposed of. (Separately, CM APPL. 1920/2026 for exemption was allowed subject to all just exceptions.)

¶1

$~58

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CM(M) 75/2026

¶4

POLE RAM .....Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Vijay Kinger, Mr. Hemant Kumar, Mr. Himanshu Kinger and Ms. Roopa Nagpal, Advocates.

¶6

versus

¶7

RAM KISHAN SHARMA -DECEASED THROUGH LRS AND ORS. .....Respondents Through: None.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA

¶9

O R D E R

¶10

% 13.01.2026

¶11

This hearing has been conducted through hybrid mode.

¶12

CM APPL. 1920/2026 (for exemption)

¶13

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶14

Accordingly, the present application is disposed of.

¶15

CM(M) 75/2026 & CM APPL. 1919/2026 (for stay)

¶16

The present petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 227 of Constitution assailing the impugned order dated 25^th September, 2025 passed by the Trial Court, whereby the application of the petitioner seeking setting aside of the order dated 10^th September, 2025 has been dismissed.

¶17

I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.

¶18

Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submits that the witnesses sought to be examined by the petitioner are the material witnesses and that the delay in their examination was beyond the control of the petitioner. It is further

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/01/2026 at 11:56:29

¶21

submitted that at every stage, the petitioner had taken appropriate steps to conclude the petitioner’s evidence.

¶22

I have carefully perused the orders dated 10^th September, 2025 and 25^th September, 2025 passed by the learned Trial Court.

¶23

The relevant portion of the order dated 10^th September, 2025 reads as under:

¶24

“…Perusal of record shows that issues were framed on 09.04.2014 and thereafter for 12 years, the plaintiff is unnecessarily lingering the matter for PE by again and again moving different application for moving fresh witnesses in the name of justice. The plaintiff has not filed any list of witness in terms of order dated 09.04.2014 for last more than 12 years. This time also, it is very clear on record that vide order dated 01.09.2025, the plaintiff was not having anything with him to call an PE and plaintiff was directed to pursue the matter diligently as the present matter is one of 20 oldest matters in the court of undersigned. The plaintiff has wasted enough time by calling the record from Bank, Registrar Office Ghaziabad and Hand Writing Expert despite the fact that plaintiff was not having any admitted hand witing of so called executed attorney at Ghaziabad. This time also, the last and final opportunity was granted to plaintiff to lead entire PE vide order dated 01.09.2025, whereafter plaintiff introduced another fresh 09 witnesses without having list of witness from last 12 years. All the witnesses mentioned in the application dated 06.09.2025 were not so that they were out of knowledge or reach of plaintiff since the day of framing of issue i.e. 09.04.2014. In last 12 years, 13 witnesses have already been examined by plaintiff. The plaintiff is stretching the PE to height of sluggishness and it is sheer wastage of precious time of court. In view of above observations, both the witnesses stand discharged as unexamined. Diet money paid to both the witnesses. PE stands closed.”

¶25

The relevant portion of the order dated 25^th September, 2025 reads as

¶26

This is a digitally signed order.

¶27

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/01/2026 at 11:56:29

¶28

under:

¶29

“…Perusal of application shows that even single reason has not been assigned for which the plaintiff want to get the order dated 10.09.2025 set aside. The issues were framed vide order dated 09.04.2014 and it is almost more than 11 years that plaintiff is lingering the matter for PE for one reason or another. In absence of any cogent ground and the application is devoid of merit, hence dismissed.”

¶30

It is evident from aforesaid orders that the issues were framed on 09^th April, 2014 and the matter has remained at the stage of plaintiff’s evidence for more than 11 years. The suit itself pertains to the year 2010. Keeping in view of these facts and the fact that as the trial of the case has been unnecessarily delayed on account of the opportunities taken by the petitioner to lead his evidence, this Court does not find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order passed by the learned Trial Court and it does not call for any interference.

¶31

Accordingly, the present petition is dismissed as being devoid of any merits. All the pending applications, if any, are also disposed of.

¶32

RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA, J

¶33

JANUARY 13, 2026 / MR/ABK

¶34

This is a digitally signed order.

¶35

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/01/2026 at 11:56:29

Pole Ram v. Ram Kishan Sharma -Deceased through Lrs and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pole Ram v. Ram Kishan Sharma -Deceased through Lrs and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Anjali Vs Mahesh Kumar

Prem Nath Vs Brij Behari Sharan and Anr.

Master Jasmehar Lamba Vs Mahinder Paul Singh

National Projects Construction Corporation Limited Vs Renaissance Aqua Sports Private Limited

Charu Singh Vs Mstc Limited & Anr.

M/S Apex Enterprises and Anr. Vs Luminous Power Technologies Pvt. Ltd.

Mohd Kamil Vs Mustaqeem

Miyush Garg Vs M/S Bhagirath Mutha and Co.

Prem Nath Vs Brij Behari Sharan and Anr.

Master Jasmehar Lamba Vs Mahinder Paul Singh

National Projects Construction Corporation Limited Vs Renaissance Aqua Sports Private Limited

Colonel Retd. Raj Kumar Vs Ex-Surgeon Commander Dr. Bhaskar Roy & Ors.

Arun Kumar Vs Praveen Kumar & Anr.

Malvinder Mohan Singh Vs Bank of Baroda